Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Winspear Resources -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E. Charters who wrote (7645)	8/10/1998 12:45:00 PM
From: Stew	Respond to of 26850

Good post. Thanks.

To: E. Charters who wrote (7645)	8/10/1998 1:16:00 PM
From: Elizabeth Andrews	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26850

The way it's supposed to ge is that 1) stake claim. This allows prospecting. If something of value is found then the company applies to mine it and the gov't is supposed to issue a permit to do so. 2) Surface rights are sold to the company for a nominal amount. Mineral rights still belong to Crown. 3) Public, native or gov't or otherwise, determines there is a better use of the property. Apparently, a claim holder is told they can't develop the property until certain conditions are met. A "better use for the property" in this case is to have the minerals processed in Nfld, economic or not. This is what happened to a Falconbridge property being developed by Geddes. They spent $50 million and had no claim. A park was a better use of the land and that's what happened. There was no expropriation. The gov't didn't allow them access to the claims. The gov't worked its way out of this by creating jobs in an uneconomic propery called Kemess now run by Royal Oak. FL had a royalty on the original Windy Craggy property and is proceeding in court to have its "interest" recognised as it got zero. The Hemlo/Lac case is completely different and is of no importance with respect to this discussion on property interests. Lac used confidential information for its own benefit and denied Hemlo a corporate opportunity that it created. The payment was for the mine and related stuff that had to built by any party to develop the mine. Lac got the money invested in the infrastructure not for its interest in the minerals because it never owned them. And the crown doesn't have to recognise the original prospectors interests just like the FL problem. I realise all of this may be counterproductive for exploration and mineral development but the gov't is interested in jobs for its people based on the resource that it owns. I can't believe that so many Canadians are so uniformed about this very important topic.